Danny Masterson asks for trial delay because of Rick Caruso's anti-Scientology ads

[Karen#1]

Danny Masterson's legal team this morning proposed that his criminal trial be delayed because of anti-Scientology political ads being aired by Los Angeles mayoral candidate and billionaire Rick Caruso.

Also, Masterson's attorney Philip Cohen proposed that the word "Scientology" be kept out of the trial, and that any references to the organization be made with such words as "the church" or "the club" or something else, again citing the Caruso ads.

About a week ago, Caruso began airing the ads that featured footage of his opponent US Representative Karen Bass giving a fawning speech at a Scientology "Ideal Org" grand opening in Los Angeles in 2010. The footage was also publicized two years ago when Bass was reportedly being considered to be Joe Biden's running mate. Bass has made it clear that although she gave the speech in 2010, she says that today she is opposed to Scientology's methods: " absolutely condemn their practices," she told ABC-7.
Read more

Danny Masterson asks for trial delay because of Rick Caruso's anti-Scientology ads

Danny Masterson's legal team this morning proposed that his criminal trial be delayed because of anti-Scientology political ads being aired by Los Angeles mayoral candidate and billionaire Rick Caruso. Also, Masterson's attorney Philip Cohen proposed that the word "Scientology" be kept out of...

tonyortega.substack.com

 

[mimsey borogrove]

I don't think the judge will agree with this Q&A. What is more interesting to me, is whether or not the CofS turned Danny's MAA and Auditing files over to the prosecution, and if they did, did the provide all of it, or was it white washed?

I would presume they would argue it was privileged material to try and quash having to deliver it up.

Re: "the church" or "the club" or something else, again citing the Caruso ads." How about the cult?

Mmsey

 

[Karen#1]

Judge is ruling tomorrow.
I am 100% sure she will rule that trial goes on.
They have cried wolf one too many times, i.e. tactics to delay delay delay.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

..

Judge is ruling tomorrow.
I am 100% sure she will rule that trial goes on.
They have cried wolf one too many times, i.e. tactics to delay delay delay.

Yes, I would imagine that you are quite right!

If the COS and accused serial rapist Masterson could postpone their civil and criminal trials based upon any public figure, celebrity or whistleblower voiced a negative opinion about the cult that was reported on cable news outlets (CNN, MSNBC, Foxnews, et al), magazines, tv shows, newspapers, televised news programs, books, twitter, facebook, instagram, tiktok, youtube, radio shows, podcasts and countless other internet venues—well then, Scientology and their OT rapists would NEVER go to trial.

Scientology has been waging a 72 year crime wave. The mere fact that people observe that they don't like innocent people being attacked, dead agented, libeled, slandered, defrauded, bankrupted, framed, stalked, lied to, tricked, fair gamed & terrorized--that shouldn't delay or derail trials. It should actually quicken and accelerate the speed to trial, in order to rid society of Hubbard's menace to society.

I wonder how in Masterson's sociopathic mind he thinks he is going to "rise above" the tightening noose of justice and return to his former glorious status as a celebrity OT planet savior?

..

 

[Karen#1]

It is my hope and desire that politicians have learned what can happen to them for attending and endorsing a SCN event.
It is likely ANONS and such will send this AD to some gullible fool lending his celebrity or uniform to this vile cult if they know who has accepted invite.
+++++++
Going into the future ~~if the SCN cult invites those with badges and uniforms and positions in government, knowing full well what happened to Karen Bass
then they are as unsavory and loathsome as portrayed on the internet.

 

[Karakorum]

I don't think the judge will agree with this Q&A. What is more interesting to me, is whether or not the CofS turned Danny's MAA and Auditing files over to the prosecution, and if they did, did the provide all of it, or was it white washed?

I strongly doubt any of his files are with ethics. I've never seen anything celebrity-related ever in any of the PAC ethics files.
Mike confirmed that OSA files were entirely separate and different - that they were much more than a collection of copies of our ethics files.

I'm 99% sure that celebrity "ethics issues" were handled by some internal OSA team that had nothing to do with the CLO or continental ethics.

So they might have very well turned in an entirely empty file for "Danny Masterson" from ethics. I have no idea how/if OSA stores documents on celebrities.

Re: "the church" or "the club" or something else, again citing the Caruso ads." How about the cult?

The "abusive and destructive high-demand, high-control, tax-exempt religious organization" maybe?

 

[mimsey borogrove]

More about the trial today on Tony's email:

Prosecution plans to call 1996 victim in Danny Masterson trial
I was wondering, what post in the SO Claire had for them to want her? Was she staff at CC? Mimsey

"Another thing we learned from yesterday’s hearing is that the prosecution has a long list of witnesses it plans to call. Cohen complained that the list contained 12 law enforcement officials, 18 civilians, and two experts.

Earlier we told you that one of those experts is former Sea Org official Claire Headley. We also learned the identity of the second expert: Mindy Mechanic, a professor in the Department of Philosophy at Cal State Fullerton, and an expert on mental health consequences of violence. She will testify about the delay in reporting from Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3.

Masterson was in attendance at the hearing, even though he wasn’t required to be. And along with him was a new member of his legal team, Karen L. Goldstein. She objected to Mechanic's inclusion, saying that it would prejudice the jury to have an expert when the words of Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3 are sufficient.

Goldstein also objected to Claire Headley, pointing out that she had sued Scientology and had appeared on Leah Remini’s show, and she said that Claire was "clearly not an unbiased person."

The prosecution responded that Claire would be testifying specifically to help understand Scientology language and documents, not about her own experiences."

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

..

Judge is ruling tomorrow.
I am 100% sure she will rule that trial goes on.
They have cried wolf one too many times, i.e. tactics to delay delay delay.

.
Perfect prediction!

The Underground Bunker just released the news that the judge 100% agrees with you.

Here is a creepily hilarious tidbit from Tony's article:

"Another request by the defense was that the word “Scientology” be excluded
from the case and replaced with references to “the church”
or “the club” and not explained to the jury."​

What an entirely deranged concept!

Imagine this was one of the infamous criminal trials where Catholic Priests were indicted for sexual abuse of young altar boys. Such a request would have prevented prosecutors and witnesses from saying the word "CATHOLIC". And, hey, let's strike that prejudicial word "PRIEST" too!

ALTAR BOY
That's when he raped me.

PROSECUTOR
Who raped you?

ALTAR
The guy at the club.​

.
CONCLUSION: Scientology is a weirdly torturous amalgam of the absurd, the wicked and the clownish.


..

 

[Type4_PTS]

I don't think the judge will agree with this Q&A. What is more interesting to me, is whether or not the CofS turned Danny's MAA and Auditing files over to the prosecution, and if they did, did the provide all of it, or was it white washed?

I would presume they would argue it was privileged material to try and quash having to deliver it up.

Re: "the church" or "the club" or something else, again citing the Caruso ads." How about the cult?

Mmsey

I bet that all of Masterson's folders have long ago been confiscated by OSA and that those folders have long since been shredded "lost". From the perspective of the CoS it is the greatest good to withhold the contents of those folders from the court. The fate of this sector of the universe depends upon it after all.

Alternatively, they could of just removed from the folders any inconvenient contents that would make CoS look bad.

My opinion: if those folders were released as is they would show that the situation with Masterson is much worse than has already been publicly alleged and that the CoS committed obstruction of justice.

 

[Lee #28]

I bet that all of Masterson's folders have long ago been confiscated by OSA and that those folders have long since been shredded "lost". From the perspective of the CoS it is the greatest good to withhold the contents of those folders from the court. The fate of this sector of the universe depends upon it after all.

Alternatively, they could of just removed from the folders any inconvenient contents that would make CoS look bad.

My opinion: if those folders were released as is they would show that the situation with Masterson is much worse than has already been publicly alleged and that the CoS committed obstruction of justice.

Certainly most likely.....

But, as there were "ethics" and "auditing" procedures involving the Plaintiffs.....then those must exist.....

They would have to be altered too....?

Are Ethics procedures considered "priest confidential?"

I guess that aspect of "confidentiality" will come up......but as Laws and Statutes have been broken .....then "confidentiality" shouldn't apply.....

As the Cult required "handlings...." there at the least will be records of having paid for them....

Perhaps even IRS documents of declaring Tax Exemption for donations....

There is even News Articles about Masterson moving his finances around.....putting properties in other people's names.....and perhaps some of his investments....being financially changed...?

I don't see how the Scientology could just brush everything under the carpet and pretend that things didn't happen.... I don't think the Judge would allow that.

 

[Karakorum]

But, as there were "ethics" and "auditing" procedures involving the Plaintiffs.....then those must exist.....

They would have to be altered too....?

If they were with regular archives in the beginning? They can be altered/removed, but it would be more difficult than it seems and the tampering could be detected if documents or computers are seized.

Ethics documents, especially those produced on the continental level, "talk with one another". If there was a relevant investigation, then parts of her files have been copied, annexed, attached to, quoted in or referenced by ethics folders of other people. Gets even worse in mainframe.

If say Jane doe 2 was ever close to someone who was an accountable unit in a large investigation, then copies of some of her documentation could possibly be attached to inv cases and folders of 50+ other people.

So scouring the whole archive to remove any and all documents related to Jane doe 2 could potentially be a massive labor-intensive undertaking, particularly given some of the chaos and mess created by ADU and/or the scanning team. I doubt it got any better since I left, most likely it just got worse and more messy.

But even if you are 100% successful in making her documents disappear from everywhere "nacht und nebel" style, you will leave some obvious gaping holes in existing documentation. As in "there was 20+ pages of something here and now it is gone" kind of thing.

So removing everything can be done. Removing everything in a way that nobody will realize stuff is gone? That's a work of art archive-wise.

I bet that all of Masterson's folders have long ago been confiscated by OSA and that those folders have long since been shredded "lost".

Co$ HATES destroying documents. They will file away literally any little thing they can find, "all info is sacred" .If this was destroyed, it was some last-resort and only once the lawsuit went radioactive.
I very strongly doubt it was done "long ago". I'd rather expect it to have been done at the last moment in OMFG-panic mode.

I don't see how the Scientology could just brush everything under the carpet and pretend that things didn't happen.... I don't think the Judge would allow that.

It is possible if the judge just meekly accepts the docs they give her. But if there is any "search-and-seize" done by a competent crew? Then for sure they wouldn't be able to hide it all. Too much documentation, too big of a mess, too much "info is holy keep everything" mentality out there. Any raid will imho cause massive exposure.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

One wonders how deeply the prosecution's investigators were able to penetrate into the cult's "code of silence" network that "handled" the Masterson situation. There have to be dozens of staff members who fully knew about the rapes and were feverishly working to bury it, whilst sec checking Masterson and fair gaming victims. It was a fantastically coordinated and delicate balancing act to keep all of that hidden for 2 decades!

However, the mafia-like code of omerta can also implode and fold very quickly like a condemned-to-demolition building, when the detonating charges are placed at the most vulnerable architectural supports.

Consider all those pieces of paper that Scientology demands, in order to "put everything in writing!" Surely there must be a detectable trail somewhere, even though the names of Masterson and his rape accusers almost certainly were cryptically hidden behind code words and a theta sounding coverup name, like Operation Fog.

The question that looms heavily overhead: IS THERE NOT AT LEAST ONE (1) CREDIBLE SCIENTOLOGY MANAGEMENT EXEC, AUDITOR, ETHICS OFFICER OR CELEBRITY CONFIDANT WHO WAS INVOLVED IN THE COVERUP WHO HAS THE BASIC HUMAN DECENCY TO STEP FORWARD AND TESTIFY?

The answer, shockingly, may be "no", based on the cult's code of overta and the protective religious shield of priest-penitant privilege perversely altered into priest-penitent(iary) privilege.

However, if one weak link breaks, the catastrophically cascading collapse could be spectacular!


.

 

[Lee #28]

Wouldn't the Plaintiffs have the right to "Discovery?" ( as far as Church Documents...)

Has the shield of religious privilege been questioned ?

I know nothing about the legal strategy. of the Case...

Since Scientology's record in the Case seems to be to protect Danny Masterson .."at all costs"......there must be something nuclear ...IMO

Of course the entire Case is nuclear....but I mean...why didn't the Cult just cut him loose 5, 10,15 or 20 years ago....and side step this situation entirely?

It looks to me that Danny Masterson's status as a "Celebrity Scientologist" is non existent at this point. He may never get a Hollywood Roll again....at this point. He is radioactive....

 

[Karen#1]

Judge Olmedo denies Danny Masterson request for trial delay

I am reposting this on this thread as it is so relevant ::::
TONY ORTEGA 's substack:
After arguments yesterday over which witnesses and evidence would be allowed in the criminal rape trial of That ‘70s Show actor Danny Masterson, Judge Charlaine Olmedo this morning issued a number of rulings ahead of next week’s trial.

She denied a defense request for a delay based on anti-Scientology campaign ads aired by mayoral candidate Rick Caruso. The defense had argued that Caruso's ads, and similarly anti-Scientology responses by his opponent Karen Bass, was creating an environment that would make it hard for Masterson, a lifelong Scientologist, to get a fair trial.

It seemed like a longshot, and it was shot down.

But Judge Olmedo also had bad news for the prosecution. The 1996 victim prosecutors wanted to call as a witness, the one we wrote about this morning, will not be allowed in the prosecution’s main case, but could be included if the defense brings her up, which seems unlikely.

Another request by the defense was that the word “Scientology” be excluded from the case and replaced with references to “the church” or “the club” and not explained to the jury.

Judge Olmedo denied this request, but she also said that the victims, based on their testimony at last year’s preliminary hearing, were quite capable of explaining Scientology policies, and so an expert like Claire Headley is not needed. If it turns out later that an expert is needed, a hearing could be held at that point to decide whether to bring in Claire. Once again, as during the prelim last year, Judge Olmedo made it clear that she will allow testimony about Scientology, but for limited purposes.

In other rulings, the prosecution will be allowed to ask Jane Doe 2 about what happened when she went to Scientology with a previous sexual assault (but not details of the assault itself).

Judge Olmedo is also excluding any testimony about the fact that if Danny is convicted, under California law the victims would then have a year to file a civil lawsuit against him for the rapes. (The defense had wanted to refer to this in order to make the argument that the women are motivated by money.)

Judge Olmedo ruled that the prosecution can introduce evidence about a specific firearm and its registration, as it relates to the allegation by Jane Doe 1 that he brandished the weapon during her attack.

Danny’s DJ name, “DJ Donkey Punch,” will be excluded.

The case is on a break, and Judge Olmedo will have more rulings later.
Read more :

Judge Olmedo denies Danny Masterson request for trial delay

After arguments yesterday over which witnesses and evidence would be allowed in the criminal rape trial of That ‘70s Show actor Danny Masterson, Judge Charlaine Olmedo this morning issued a number of rulings ahead of next week’s trial. She denied a defense request for a delay based on...

tonyortega.substack.com

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

..

Wouldn't the Plaintiffs have the right to "Discovery?" ( as far as Church Documents...)

Has the shield of religious privilege been questioned ?

.
An interesting question!

When i have time i am curious to do a little research on whether a Scientology "priest" (hey everyone in the COS is suddenly a minister, right?) can be subpoenaed and forced to testify. Here's the first quickie search result so far:

- - -​

​

Peter Francis Joseph DeFazio​

.....MA, MDiv. Enjoy Scripture, Nature & Science Fiction

There are two aspects to this question: (A) Civil law, and (B) Church law. Under the civil law of a particular jurisdiction Catholic priests could indeed be required to reveal something learned from within the seal of Confession. But under Church law, Catholic priests will refuse to comply with such a law because it infringes upon the very integrity of the Sacrament.​

​

Perhaps the priests in such a scenario will tell the civil authorities,​

Whether it is right in the sight of God for us to obey you rather than God, you be the judges.​

(Acts 4:19, Bible Gateway passage: Acts 4:19 - New American Bible (Revised Edition)​

​

But Catholic priests are bound by their promises made at ordination to never, ever violate the seal of the Sacrament of Confession.​

Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives. This secret, which admits of no exceptions, is called the “sacramental seal,” because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains “sealed” by the sacrament.​

(Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1467, Catechism of the Catholic Church, which references the Code of Canon Law, n. 1388.)​

- - -​

I am seeing other search results where the priest chose martyrdom rather than break his sacred oath to the Catholic Church. In effect, they willingly suffered the sanctions or penalties imposed by the judge for refusal to respond.

Much more research needed when there is time. . .


..

 

[Lee #28]

..
An interesting question!

When i have time i am curious to do a little research on whether a Scientology "priest" (hey everyone in the COS is suddenly a minister, right?) can be subpoenaed and forced to testify. Here's the first quickie search result so far:

- - ​

Peter Francis Joseph DeFazio​

.....MA, MDiv. Enjoy Scripture, Nature & Science Fiction

There are two aspects to this question: (A) Civil law, and (B) Church law. Under the civil law of a particular jurisdiction Catholic priests could indeed be required to reveal something learned from within the seal of Confession. But under Church law, Catholic priests will refuse to comply with such a law because it infringes upon the very integrity of the Sacrament.​

​

Perhaps the priests in such a scenario will tell the civil authorities,​

Whether it is right in the sight of God for us to obey you rather than God, you be the judges.​

(Acts 4:19, Bible Gateway passage: Acts 4:19 - New American Bible (Revised Edition)​

​

But Catholic priests are bound by their promises made at ordination to never, ever violate the seal of the Sacrament of Confession.​

Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives. This secret, which admits of no exceptions, is called the “sacramental seal,” because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains “sealed” by the sacrament.​

(Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1467, Catechism of the Catholic Church, which references the Code of Canon Law, n. 1388.)​

- - -​

I am seeing other search results where the priest chose martyrdom rather than break his sacred oath to the Catholic Church. In effect, they willingly suffered the sanctions or penalties imposed by the judge for refusal to respond.

Much more research needed when there is time. . .

Thanks. Very interesting.

I didn't follow those Catholic sexual abuse trials much.....

But.....I was aware that Documents as to things like Priest's Transfers......the Church Documentation as to accused Priests being foisted off on different parishes......

All that Documentation was, I guess, Official Church Business.....and not protected by any sort of Priest Confidentiality.... That all came out in the News.... What the "Mother Church" did in hiding the Priests actions......came out in the News....

Basically Administrative and Organizational actions.....and not Priest / Parishioner related....IMO

I can't see any sort of confidentiality for Private Eyes.....and or any Thugs sent out on missions....

Can't see any sort of Religious Protection as to any Courses or Training....or perhaps any Ethics Handling....or perhaps even " I'm not Auditing you" False Purpose Rundowns....the the Scientology required the Plaintiffs to do and pay for...

Plus.....with all the Lawyers that Danny has had on this case.....each one most likely had Private Eyes...and such that could potentially break down...under the right circumstances...

 

[Karen#1]

The Daily Mail does not miss a beat.

Laughter.


EXCLUSIVE: Scientologist Danny Masterson asks judge to POSTPONE rape trial because of Los Angeles mayoral election - claiming biased candidates have bashed the church in campaign ads

• That '70s Show actor Danny Masterson appeared in court today ahead of his rape trial in Los Angeles
• His lawyer Philip Cohen asked the judge to delay the trial due to start October 11 until after the Los Angeles mayoral race on November 8
• Both candidates - Karen Bass and Rick Caruso - have bashed the Church of Scientology in television ads
• Masterson - who is a devout Scientologist - wants to prevent a jury from being biased by the candidates' anti-Scientology comments
• Masterson, 46, has pleaded not guilty to raping three women at his Hollywood Hills home between 2001 and 2003

(Some new data points here. Masterson says Leah Remini is masterminding the case ! see 1 minute video clip LOL)



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11276223/Scientologist-Danny-Masterson-asks-postpone-rape-trial-mayoral-election.html

 

[Type4_PTS]

Co$ HATES destroying documents. They will file away literally any little thing they can find, "all info is sacred" .If this was destroyed, it was some last-resort and only once the lawsuit went radioactive.
I very strongly doubt it was done "long ago". I'd rather expect it to have been done at the last moment in OMFG-panic mode.

Yeah, they hate destroying documents but when it is the "greatest good" they'll destroy documents. Ask Marty Rathbun about that.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Thanks. Very interesting.

I didn't follow those Catholic sexual abuse trails much.....

But.....I was aware that Documents as to things like Priest's Transfers......the Church Documentation as to accused Priests being foisted off on different parishes......

All that Documentation was, I guess, Official Church Business.....and not protected by any sort of Priest Confidentiality.... That all came out in the News.... What the "Mother Church" did in hiding the Priests actions......came out in the News....

Basically Administrative and Organizational actions.....and not Priest / Parishioner related....IMO

Can't see any sort of Religious Protection as to any Courses or Training....or perhaps any Ethics Handling....or perhaps even " I'm not Auditing you" False Purpose Rundowns....the the Scientology required the Plaintiffs to do and pay for...

Plus.....with all the Lawyers that Danny has had on this case.....each one most likely had Private Eyes...and such that could potentially break down...under the right circumstances...

I'm certainly not an expert on this arcane area of legal privileges, but here's my best guess:

(you posted): "Can't see any sort of Religious Protection as to any Courses or Training....or perhaps any Ethics Handling....or perhaps even " I'm not Auditing you" False Purpose Rundowns....the the Scientology required the Plaintiffs to do and pay for..."​

Keeping in mind that in a Catholic Church the confession is also not an ethics handling, training or metered auditing procedure, it would seem that the simple act of "CONFESSING" is what is protected, not the manner in which the confession is solicited. Ergo, if someone "CONFESSES" in a Scientology Org, it really wouldn't make any difference if they did so in an auditing session, a sec check, an ethics course or as part of an ethics handling. I believe the COS could easily invoke priest-penitent privilege under virtually any scenario where a "Scientology Minister" (or even a Volunteer Minister who has never done the minister's course) is "handling" someone.

(you posted): "Plus.....with all the Lawyers that Danny has had on this case.....each one most likely had Private Eyes...and such that could potentially break down...under the right circumstances..."​

It would be expected that lawyers would invoke a parallel "lawyer/client privilege" and remain silent under any questioning, interrogatories or solicitations for information about Masterson.

I wonder if some of the prosecution's subpoenaed witnesses (who are Scientologists) have been coached by OSA to avoid answering questions by invoking priest-penitent privilege, which sounds so much theta to the jury than repeatedly stonewalling with: "I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may tend to incriminate me". LOL

..

 

[Type4_PTS]

Since Scientology's record in the Case seems to be to protect Danny Masterson .."at all costs"......there must be something nuclear ...IMO

That they haven't thrown Masterson under the bus years ago is telling. Maybe Masterson agreed not to write a tell-all book upon his conviction if Scientology provided for his legal defense.

Aside from any legal issues that Scientology may or may not have if the general public became aware that Scientology protects sexual predators, in effect enabling them to go out and continue their predatory behavior this would be the mother of all PR flaps, sending their popularity into lowest-ever territory. Maybe this kind of thing along with the human trafficking and other cases could be enough to even get the feds interested in reviewing their tax exemption. I doubt it but am fine being wrong about that issue.